PDA

View Full Version : Aiming to off table point vs. parallel shifting



Soflasnapper
04-04-2012, 12:03 PM
For banking and kicking, I've long used the diamonds to form a virtual triangle from the cue ball to the ghost ball contact that makes the shot or hit.

I've been aware of the aim at the spot on the wall technique, but mainly as a guideline for a 3-railer aiming point. I haven't done much of that, as it differs from table to table of course (probably should work up such aim lines on the couple of tables I use most frequently, including mainly the table at my house).

I have experimented briefly with spots on the wall for situations like the double the points shots, and I found it to be remarkably accurate for that (removing the guesswork entirely!), but I shoot that rarely to never so mainly I've had the notion in reserve, knowledge that I didn't employ in my game.

Recently a 3-C player remarked that when playing pocket billiards (maybe also in 3-C play), he used off table aim points a lot-- not pre-set or pre-learned, as to go to a corner, but on the fly, for routine kicks or banks.

I realized that as part of the lineups I perform with triangles using the diamonds, the track usually falls off the line of the cue ball, so I try to get a close track, and then parallel the line over to and through the center of the cue ball. What I'm trying now is, instead of paralleling over, I get an off-table aim point that is exact to a known line, and then aim the off-track line cue ball to that same point.

Seems to work great, and really gives me confidence on some harder to see kick lines, and better accuracy on banks as well.

Reason is, I think, both the paralleling over, AND the aim to a convergence point are off a bit, but the aiming to a convergent point is closer to accurate for me.

If you're mainly a feel shooter on such shots, this will probably not be helpful, but if you use a variant of the isosceles triangle (two equal length sides) for them, and use the paralleling method with that, give it a try.

cushioncrawler
04-05-2012, 03:45 AM
Duz anyone during praktis ever uze say one or two or three mirrors, placed against the rails, to check the angles.
Theze mirrors would probly needtabe placed on the face of lumber allmost a halfball wide.
Do mirrors help.
I used to hav one mirror -- i seem to recall that it didnt help me much.
mac.

Rich R.
04-05-2012, 05:02 AM
I've tried the spot on the wall system but I had only read a little about it and I really didn't spend too much time working with it. Obviously, it didn't work for me.

Frankly, I came to the conclusion that I couldn't remember a spot for each table, in each room, I played. Maybe, if I knew the system well enough, I could pick out a spot during a short warm up on a table.

I probably don't spend enough time on banking and the different systems that would help my banking game. I actually try to avoid banks as much as possible and, when I'm confronted with an unavoidable bank, I fall back on a very basic form of the diamond system.

cushioncrawler
04-05-2012, 03:47 PM
When i used to play snooker i once placed a hi-chair to show me the aim-point for doubles into a mid-pkt.
This iz the only time i hav ever cheated.
Aktually i dont think that i uzed the chair in my match -- so praps a lawyer would get me off.
Anyhow i am going straight now.
mac.

SpiderMan
04-05-2012, 05:57 PM
I use the vanishing-point technique to compensate off-line two (short rail first) and three (long rail first) kicks to the corner, and it's usually good for a hit. But it's easy to show examples of simple single-rail kicks that would be miles off using the same technique. Maybe I didn't follow exactly what you are doing?

SpiderMan

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Soflasnapper</div><div class="ubbcode-body">For banking and kicking, I've long used the diamonds to form a virtual triangle from the cue ball to the ghost ball contact that makes the shot or hit.

I've been aware of the aim at the spot on the wall technique, but mainly as a guideline for a 3-railer aiming point. I haven't done much of that, as it differs from table to table of course (probably should work up such aim lines on the couple of tables I use most frequently, including mainly the table at my house).

I have experimented briefly with spots on the wall for situations like the double the points shots, and I found it to be remarkably accurate for that (removing the guesswork entirely!), but I shoot that rarely to never so mainly I've had the notion in reserve, knowledge that I didn't employ in my game.

Recently a 3-C player remarked that when playing pocket billiards (maybe also in 3-C play), he used off table aim points a lot-- not pre-set or pre-learned, as to go to a corner, but on the fly, for routine kicks or banks.

I realized that as part of the lineups I perform with triangles using the diamonds, the track usually falls off the line of the cue ball, so I try to get a close track, and then parallel the line over to and through the center of the cue ball. What I'm trying now is, instead of paralleling over, I get an off-table aim point that is exact to a known line, and then aim the off-track line cue ball to that same point.

Seems to work great, and really gives me confidence on some harder to see kick lines, and better accuracy on banks as well.

Reason is, I think, both the paralleling over, AND the aim to a convergence point are off a bit, but the aiming to a convergent point is closer to accurate for me.

If you're mainly a feel shooter on such shots, this will probably not be helpful, but if you use a variant of the isosceles triangle (two equal length sides) for them, and use the paralleling method with that, give it a try.

</div></div>

Soflasnapper
04-07-2012, 10:11 AM
The main tweak to make this work for me is to choose a reference line INSIDE my cue ball position line, so that the sighted off-table point is for a reference shot line closer to the object ball. Getting the spot sighted from an inside line makes sighting to it from a cue ball position outside it do the convergence.

On now some occasions that I've had a more convenient outside reference line, that convergence doesn't work as well. I think that's logical and it's now my tentative theory at least.